RUMOR - President Trump Suspects That Steve Bannon LEAKS Damaging Information.

originally posted by: 3daysgone

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: Vorian

Bannon was good at using his Breitbart publication to help make Hillary look like an even worse candidate than she was. But you're right.. If Bannon is a habitual leaker, he has to go. If he's not serving a useful purpose, he's a distraction. There's enough distractions outside the White House.

That would beg the question though. Do you really want to get rid of the guy that got you to the ball, and also knows how he got you there? That is unless Trump is confident in the outcome.

President Trump is really a "softie" when it comes to his friends. If Jeff Sessions was a non-friend/jerk/nutjob like James Comey was, Trump would have fired him, instead of working (in Trump's own way) to get AG Sessions on track.

The President likes Bannon too. If Bannon is fired, it will be Chief of Staff Kelly who hands him the pink-slip.

originally posted by: mOjOm
a reply to: pheonix358

No yes men??? Seriously???

That's all he wants around him. That's why he demands their loyalty to him and gets upset if he doesn't get it.

The problem is that yes men end up going along with Trumps bad ideas because they have no other option. But since Trump can't take the heat for it, they do, he fires them and blames them for it and moves on to the next yes man.

Yes men are the major pieces on the chessboard that get hit protecting the king for the bad moves he makes in the game. Pretty soon you have lost too many of them and it's only a matter of time until game over.

True. He fires those who aren't. Except maybe Scaramucchi he was told to fire lol

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: 3daysgone

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: Vorian

Bannon was good at using his Breitbart publication to help make Hillary look like an even worse candidate than she was. But you're right.. If Bannon is a habitual leaker, he has to go. If he's not serving a useful purpose, he's a distraction. There's enough distractions outside the White House.

That would beg the question though. Do you really want to get rid of the guy that got you to the ball, and also knows how he got you there? That is unless Trump is confident in the outcome.

President Trump is really a "softie" when it comes to his friends. If Jeff Sessions was a non-friend/jerk/nutjob like James Comey was, Trump would have fired him, instead of working (in Trump's own way) to get AG Sessions on track.

The President likes Bannon too. If Bannon is fired, it will be Chief of Staff Kelly who hands him the pink-slip.

Comey did a fantastic job and had a long career. Sessions is an old biggot. The only thing Sessions did right was recuse himself...which p*ssed Trump off. The only reason Trump won't fire him is because Repub leadership told him that is one of the lines he can't cross- and also may be a legal line he can;t cross.

a reply to: mOjOm

That's all he wants around him. That's why he demands their loyalty to him and gets upset if he doesn't get it.

Every leader demands loyalty from his advisers. Wouldn't you if you held the most powerful position in the world? I would.

The problem is that yes men end up going along with Trumps bad ideas because they have no other option. But since Trump can't take the heat for it, they do, he fires them and blames them for it and moves on to the next yes man.

Any sources to back that up? True sources. Sources that you think are loyal to you.

Yes men are the major pieces on the chessboard that get hit protecting the king for the bad moves he makes in the game. Pretty soon you have lost too many of them and it's only a matter of time until game over.

Trump doesn't want yes men. Trump wants people who can help this country. Help this country heal. Maybe Steve can't do that?

originally posted by: Vorian

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: Vorian

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: Vorian

Bannon was good at using his Breitbart publication to help make Hillary look like an even worse candidate than she was. But you're right.. If Bannon is a habitual leaker, he has to go. If he's not serving a useful purpose, he's a distraction. There's enough distractions outside the White House.

IF??? Bannon was the most obvious nut to begin with.

Obviously you have studied his personality and habits. I have no clue, other than he was an owner of Breitbart, and before that, a U.S. Navy officer. Being former Navy myself I was glad to see him appointed as a trusted advisor. But if Bannon's not trustworthy, he's got to go. CNN is worse than 100 Bannons...but that's another thread.

No, one Bannon is worse that 1 million CNNs. One FOX is worse than 1 Bannon, maybe.

Bannon allegedly leaks info about personality stuff...soap opera material. If you watched CNN this past week, you'd think that it was headquartered in North Korea, and owned by Kim Jong. If you just periodically tuned to CNN, you know exactly what I'm talking about.

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: 3daysgone

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: Vorian

Bannon was good at using his Breitbart publication to help make Hillary look like an even worse candidate than she was. But you're right.. If Bannon is a habitual leaker, he has to go. If he's not serving a useful purpose, he's a distraction. There's enough distractions outside the White House.

That would beg the question though. Do you really want to get rid of the guy that got you to the ball, and also knows how he got you there? That is unless Trump is confident in the outcome.

President Trump is really a "softie" when it comes to his friends. If Jeff Sessions was a non-friend/jerk/nutjob like James Comey was, Trump would have fired him, instead of working (in Trump's own way) to get AG Sessions on track.

The President likes Bannon too. If Bannon is fired, it will be Chief of Staff Kelly who hands him the pink-slip.

I say let him fire who he will. Trump will not put up with failure. Even from his advisers. He will do his best to find the best person for the job. To bad there are not many who can do the job that is expected of them.

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: Vorian

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: Vorian

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: Vorian

Bannon was good at using his Breitbart publication to help make Hillary look like an even worse candidate than she was. But you're right.. If Bannon is a habitual leaker, he has to go. If he's not serving a useful purpose, he's a distraction. There's enough distractions outside the White House.

IF??? Bannon was the most obvious nut to begin with.

Obviously you have studied his personality and habits. I have no clue, other than he was an owner of Breitbart, and before that, a U.S. Navy officer. Being former Navy myself I was glad to see him appointed as a trusted advisor. But if Bannon's not trustworthy, he's got to go. CNN is worse than 100 Bannons...but that's another thread.

No, one Bannon is worse that 1 million CNNs. One FOX is worse than 1 Bannon, maybe.

Bannon allegedly leaks info about personality stuff...soap opera material. If you watched CNN this past week, you'd think that it was headquartered in North Korea, and owned by Kim Jong. If you just periodically tuned to CNN, you know exactly what I'm talking about.

I watch CNN, they gave no impression that they were Pro North Korea. I have no idea where you got that.
I have seen pundits on there state the OBVIOUS: Do not hit NK as they will then hit Guam, SK and Japan.

FOX news says about the same thing.

Do you spend a lot of time watching CNN?

originally posted by: 3daysgone

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: 3daysgone

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: Vorian

Bannon was good at using his Breitbart publication to help make Hillary look like an even worse candidate than she was. But you're right.. If Bannon is a habitual leaker, he has to go. If he's not serving a useful purpose, he's a distraction. There's enough distractions outside the White House.

That would beg the question though. Do you really want to get rid of the guy that got you to the ball, and also knows how he got you there? That is unless Trump is confident in the outcome.

President Trump is really a "softie" when it comes to his friends. If Jeff Sessions was a non-friend/jerk/nutjob like James Comey was, Trump would have fired him, instead of working (in Trump's own way) to get AG Sessions on track.

The President likes Bannon too. If Bannon is fired, it will be Chief of Staff Kelly who hands him the pink-slip.

I say let him fire who he will. Trump will not put up with failure. Even from his advisers. He will do his best to find the best person for the job. To bad there are not many who can do the job that is expected of them.

LOL,. this is NOT 'the Apprentice'

originally posted by: Vorian

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: 3daysgone

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: Vorian

Bannon was good at using his Breitbart publication to help make Hillary look like an even worse candidate than she was. But you're right.. If Bannon is a habitual leaker, he has to go. If he's not serving a useful purpose, he's a distraction. There's enough distractions outside the White House.

That would beg the question though. Do you really want to get rid of the guy that got you to the ball, and also knows how he got you there? That is unless Trump is confident in the outcome.

President Trump is really a "softie" when it comes to his friends. If Jeff Sessions was a non-friend/jerk/nutjob like James Comey was, Trump would have fired him, instead of working (in Trump's own way) to get AG Sessions on track.

The President likes Bannon too. If Bannon is fired, it will be Chief of Staff Kelly who hands him the pink-slip.

Comey did a fantastic job and had a long career. Sessions is an old biggot. The only thing Sessions did right was recuse himself...which p*ssed Trump off. The only reason Trump won't fire him is because Repub leadership told him that is one of the lines he can't cross- and also may be a legal line he can;t cross.

If the Democrats ever start strategizing how to win elections, instead of displaying jealousy and hate, they can be in a position to install their own people in power.

We're getting closer to 2018, and that change of course doesn't seem to be materializing.

From what I've seen of Republicans this year, it's possible that both parties prefer being out of power, and hating those who are in power.

Well, I am off. But in regard to the OP, Steve Bannon IS a DAMAGE. No idea why he was anywhere near the oval office, but still have no idea why Trump is anywhere near the Oval Office.

a reply to: carewemust

Bannon allegedly leaks info about personality stuff...soap opera material. If you watched CNN this past week, you'd think that it was headquartered in North Korea, and owned by Kim Jong. If you just periodically tuned to CNN, you know exactly what I'm talking about.

CNN. Yeah boy. lol. I am glad that they have showed their true colors. They do not want news. They want to give their opinion on news. But it is just like all the others including Fox. It is best to get the words straight from the President. The way the news spins what he says is actually opening up more peoples eyes. President Trump is exactly what this nation needs right now.

originally posted by: Vorian
Well, I am off. But in regard to the OP, Steve Bannon IS a DAMAGE. No idea why he was anywhere near the oval office, but still have no idea why Trump is anywhere near the Oval Office.

You will figure it out when you get older.

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: Vorian

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: 3daysgone

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: Vorian

Bannon was good at using his Breitbart publication to help make Hillary look like an even worse candidate than she was. But you're right.. If Bannon is a habitual leaker, he has to go. If he's not serving a useful purpose, he's a distraction. There's enough distractions outside the White House.

That would beg the question though. Do you really want to get rid of the guy that got you to the ball, and also knows how he got you there? That is unless Trump is confident in the outcome.

President Trump is really a "softie" when it comes to his friends. If Jeff Sessions was a non-friend/jerk/nutjob like James Comey was, Trump would have fired him, instead of working (in Trump's own way) to get AG Sessions on track.

The President likes Bannon too. If Bannon is fired, it will be Chief of Staff Kelly who hands him the pink-slip.

Comey did a fantastic job and had a long career. Sessions is an old biggot. The only thing Sessions did right was recuse himself...which p*ssed Trump off. The only reason Trump won't fire him is because Repub leadership told him that is one of the lines he can't cross- and also may be a legal line he can;t cross.

If the Democrats ever start strategizing how to win elections, instead of displaying jealousy and hate, they can be in a position to install their own people in power.

We're getting closer to 2018, and that change of course doesn't seem to be materializing.

From what I've seen of Republicans this year, it's possible that both parties prefer being out of power, and hating those who are in power.

The repubs have failed and the Dems have not really picked up an organized retaliation. This is true. I am hoping that Trump being incompetent alone will turn the tide. But after the recent divisiveness, I really don't know.

a reply to: Vorian

No. It is not the apprentice, but I am glad to see that Trump still doesn't mind firing people who cant do the job.

a reply to: Vorian

I think he also likes revenge on certain people as well. Like the Mooch, who once said a bunch of negative things about him but then started sucking up to him for a place at the big boy table and tried erasing all that stuff. Those people I sometimes think Trump likes flipping them just so he can fire them.

He doesn't forget about what they said or did in the past but when they come around wanting to suck up to him he let them do it, gives them a little pat on the head so they think they're in good with the big guy at the top. Then he sees just how far they'll go in sucking up and humiliate themselves, then he's done with them and tosses them aside knowing that he got his sweet revenge by turning them out like that.

a reply to: 3daysgone

Nope, no sources of proof of any kind for this. This is purely my opinion and how I see it. I admit I may be off a little too but think I'm pretty close to being accurate.

originally posted by: Vorian

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: Vorian

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: Vorian

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: Vorian

Bannon was good at using his Breitbart publication to help make Hillary look like an even worse candidate than she was. But you're right.. If Bannon is a habitual leaker, he has to go. If he's not serving a useful purpose, he's a distraction. There's enough distractions outside the White House.

IF??? Bannon was the most obvious nut to begin with.

Obviously you have studied his personality and habits. I have no clue, other than he was an owner of Breitbart, and before that, a U.S. Navy officer. Being former Navy myself I was glad to see him appointed as a trusted advisor. But if Bannon's not trustworthy, he's got to go. CNN is worse than 100 Bannons...but that's another thread.

No, one Bannon is worse that 1 million CNNs. One FOX is worse than 1 Bannon, maybe.

Bannon allegedly leaks info about personality stuff...soap opera material. If you watched CNN this past week, you'd think that it was headquartered in North Korea, and owned by Kim Jong. If you just periodically tuned to CNN, you know exactly what I'm talking about.

I watch CNN, they gave no impression that they were Pro North Korea. I have no idea where you got that.
I have seen pundits on there state the OBVIOUS: Do not hit NK as they will then hit Guam, SK and Japan.

FOX news says about the same thing.

Do you spend a lot of time watching CNN?

I either Watch CNN-TV, or Listen to CNN-XM Radio, about 2 hours a day...and 1 hour late night. (Sadly it's the only news network that's "live" at 2am.)

This past week, most of the big red banners were about Donald Trump's Fire/Fury, and the "experts" on the panel saying how threatening those words were. If you'd never seen CNN before, you would have thought that it was a pro-North Korea TV news channel.

Rarely did CNN discuss the North Korea threat to Guam. And when they did, it was only discussing the potential damage NK could do to Guam, and how the missiles could easily reach that island.

Right this moment (1:30am CDT) CNN is taking words from President Trump's pastor and using them against the President. CNN wouldn't even attach President Trump to religion unless there was something negative that could be spun-up and reported.

CNN causes FAR more damage to America than 100 Steve Bannons could.

originally posted by: 3daysgone
a reply to: Vorian

No. It is not the apprentice, but I am glad to see that Trump still doesn't mind firing people who cant do the job.

I wish he could fire a handful of Senators!

originally posted by: Vorian

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: Vorian

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: 3daysgone

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: Vorian

Bannon was good at using his Breitbart publication to help make Hillary look like an even worse candidate than she was. But you're right.. If Bannon is a habitual leaker, he has to go. If he's not serving a useful purpose, he's a distraction. There's enough distractions outside the White House.

That would beg the question though. Do you really want to get rid of the guy that got you to the ball, and also knows how he got you there? That is unless Trump is confident in the outcome.

President Trump is really a "softie" when it comes to his friends. If Jeff Sessions was a non-friend/jerk/nutjob like James Comey was, Trump would have fired him, instead of working (in Trump's own way) to get AG Sessions on track.

The President likes Bannon too. If Bannon is fired, it will be Chief of Staff Kelly who hands him the pink-slip.

Comey did a fantastic job and had a long career. Sessions is an old biggot. The only thing Sessions did right was recuse himself...which p*ssed Trump off. The only reason Trump won't fire him is because Repub leadership told him that is one of the lines he can't cross- and also may be a legal line he can;t cross.

If the Democrats ever start strategizing how to win elections, instead of displaying jealousy and hate, they can be in a position to install their own people in power.

We're getting closer to 2018, and that change of course doesn't seem to be materializing.

From what I've seen of Republicans this year, it's possible that both parties prefer being out of power, and hating those who are in power.

The repubs have failed and the Dems have not really picked up an organized retaliation. This is true. I am hoping that Trump being incompetent alone will turn the tide. But after the recent divisiveness, I really don't know.

People will vote based on what they see/feel when surveying their own quality-of-life.

a reply to: mOjOm

I admit I may be off a little too but think I'm pretty close to being accurate.

So you wouldn't want loyalty from your advisers?